It is clear that \(X_{c}\)  and \(X_{0}\)  are different particles and their decay
channels differ from each another. Nevertheless, it is convenient to compare
parameters of \(X_{c}\)  with LHCb data to make some preliminary assumptions on
structure of \(X_{0}\) . The mass of the ground-state tetraquark \(X_{c}\)  is not
large enough to account for LHCb data. We must also take into account that,
the tetraquark \(X_{c}\)  is composed of a relatively heavy diquark \([su]\)  and
heavy antidiquark \([\overline{c}\overline{d}]\) , whereas \(X_{0}\)  would has a
light diquark \([ud]\) -heavy antidiquark \([\overline{c}\overline{s}]\) 
structure. Heavy-light tetraquarks are more compact and lighter than ones
with the same quark content but other compositions [1]}.
Therefore, the mass of the resonance \(X_{0}\)  should be within or even below
limits (REF )-(REF ) provided we treat it as a
ground-state tetraquark: In the diquark-antidiquark picture \(X_{0}\)  may be
considered as a radially excited \([ud][\overline{c}\overline{s}]\)  state [2]}.
